4.7 Review

Common risk factors for heart failure and cancer

期刊

CARDIOVASCULAR RESEARCH
卷 115, 期 5, 页码 844-853

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/cvr/cvz035

关键词

Cardio-oncology; Heart failure; Risk factors; Cardiovascular risk factors; Hypertension; Lipids; Biomarkers; Inflammation

资金

  1. Netherlands Heart Foundation (CVON DOSIS) [2014-40]
  2. Netherlands Heart Foundation (CVON SHE-PREDICTS-HF) [2017-21]
  3. Netherlands Heart Foundation (CVON RED-CVD) [2017-11]
  4. Innovational Research Incentives Scheme programme of the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO VIDI) [917.13.350]
  5. European Research Council [ERC CoG 818715]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cardiovascular (CV) disease and cancer are the leading causes of death.(1,2) Over the last decades, it has been appreciated that both CV disease and cancer are more common in individuals in whom risk factors for disease development accumulate, and preventative measures have been extremely important in driving down the incidence of disease.(3-6) In general, the field of epidemiology, risk reduction, and preventative trials is divided into health care professionals who have an interest in either CV disease or cancer. As a result, the medical literature and medical practice has largely focused on the one disease, or the other. However, human individuals do not behave according to this dogma. Emerging data clearly suggest that identical risk factors may lead to CV disease in the one individual, but may cause cancer in another, or even both diseases in the same individual. This overlap exists between risk factors that are historically classified as CV risk factors' as these factors do equally strong predict cancer development. Therefore, we propose that a holistic approach might better estimate actual risks for CV disease and cancer. In this review, we summarize current insights in common behavioural risk factors for heart failure, being the most progressed and lethal form of CV disease, and cancer.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据